# Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct

> Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemini-2-0-pro-vs-llama-3-3-70b-instruct
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 12

## Summary

- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher in 7 categories and Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Gemini 2.0 Pro leads 37.1 to 14.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is MATH Level 5: 83.5% for Gemini 2.0 Pro and 41.6% for Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct.
- Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 38.6 | 30.3 |
| Rank | 171 | 283 |
| Context | — | 128K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.10 |
| Output $/M | — | $0.32 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.4 (#182)
- Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 30.6 (#284)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | 36.6% |
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | — |
| SciCode | — | 26% |
| WeirdML | — | 14.4% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 46.9% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1268 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 57.5% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: —
- Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 25.6 (#100)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 31.9% |
| BALROG | — | 23% |

## Reasoning

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 21.6 (#194)
- Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 13.7 (#325)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | 50.8% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | 49.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | 127.32 |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | 50.2% |
| SimpleBench | — | 19.9% |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1257 |
| DTBench | — | 59.5% |
| LMCA | — | 17.5% |
| ForecastBench | — | 58.6 |

## Math

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.1 (#101)
- Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 14.3 (#292)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | 71% | 42.2% |
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | 41.6% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 5.1% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1268 |

## Knowledge

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#156)
- Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 30.5 (#220)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | 47.4% |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | 22.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 4.1% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1225 |
| MMLU | — | 86.3% |

## Multilingual

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: —
- Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 40.1 (#215)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1236 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1217 |
| LMArena French | — | 1280 |
| LMArena German | — | 1251 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1149 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1142 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1252 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1269 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.6 (#57)
- Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 71.3 (#152)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | 82.7% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1242 |

## Long Context

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.1 (#287)
- Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 26.4 (#290)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | 33.3% |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1256 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#164)
- Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 47.8 (#203)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | 39.2% |
| LMArena Text | — | 1274 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1250 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1279 |

## FAQ

### Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct?

Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct better for coding?

Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.4 versus 30.6 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct has 43.